BVA9504703 DOCKET NO. 93-08 633 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania THE ISSUE Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a disorder of the digestive system. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Rebecca A. Kelly, Associate Counsel REMAND The veteran served on active duty from September 1942 through December 1945. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the Board) on appeal from a decision in May 1992, by the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) which found that the evidence submitted were duplicates of service medical records previously of record and therefore, were not new and material. A hearing was held in February 1994 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, before a member of this Board and who was designated by the Chairman to conduct that hearing pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 7102(b) (West 1991). The veteran contends that his stomach disorder began during active duty when the mess hall food made him so ill that he was hospitalized for several weeks with severe and sharp gastrointestinal pain that caused him to vomit blood and lose weight. He asserts that since separation, he has taken medication, his diet has been bland and he has avoided coffee and alcohol in order to minimize the symptoms from his stomach disorder. He asserts that his stomach disorder was the reason he quit his job in 1970. The veteran's representative supports all of the veteran's contentions and requests the Board to render a fair decision using all pertinent regulations and to resolve all doubt in the veteran's favor. The VA has a duty to provide a fully developed evidentiary record upon which a fair and sound decision can be made in every veteran's claim for benefits. Schfrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 589 (1991). The veteran's disorder must be fully developed in terms of a medical classification and interpreted in light of the whole history of that particular disorder. Id. Secondly, the medical examination reports must articulate the effects of the veteran's diagnosed disorder upon his or her capacity for employment and for his or her performance of ordinary activities in daily living. Id. Upon reviewing the record, the Board finds that the evidence of record remains incomplete. The only recent evidence of the veteran's current medical condition is the subjective evidence from his testimony of February 1994. However, as a layman, the veteran is not qualified to render opinions as to medical causation. Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 492 (1992). Moreover, there is no recent medical evidence of record to establish a diagnosis or assess the veteran's present functional level of impairment. Under the circumstances of this case, it is the opinion of the undersigned that additional assistance is necessary, and this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following: 1. The RO should afford the veteran a special medical examination by a physician specializing in digestive disorders. This examiner should specifically render an opinion as to the etiology of any currently manifested disability of the digestive system and its relationship, if any, to the so called stomach disorder in World War II service. All indicated special studies should be accomplished, as deemed necessary by the physician. The claims folder must be made available to the examiner prior to the examination so that the veteran's entire history can be taken into consideration. 2. Once the above requested evidence is received, the RO should readjudicate the issue of whether new and material evidence has been submitted to justify the reopening of the veteran's claim. In the event that the veteran's claim remains denied, in whole or in part, he and his representative should be provided with an appropriate supplemental statement of the case, and an opportunity to respond, and the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration if otherwise in order. C.P. RUSSELL Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1994).